<p>A review of five national standards for one-dimensional constant rate of displacement (CRD) consolidation tests reveals remarkable inconsistencies in the formulas used for determining the consolidation properties of soils under large deformations. The determination of finite-strain consolidation properties requires a large deformation consolidation analysis, and vice versa. To meet this requirement, natural strain and effective stress, which are work-conjugate pairs in the Eulerian framework, are selected to model the large deformation behavior of soils subjected to CRD testing. A simplified analytical model is built based on the assumption that the natural strain profile is parabolic. With this model, formulas are derived for determining the hydraulic conductivity, the coefficient of volume compressibility, and the coefficient of consolidation. A generalized numerical model is established by solving a normalized governing equation under known moving boundary conditions with a finite difference scheme, which uses an adaptive grid deformation technique to eliminate the convective term present in the material time derivative. The simplified analytical model is verified against the generalized numerical model. The parabolic natural strain profile assumption is shown to be valid for tests performed at normalized displacement rates less than 0.1, with an acceptable (≥ 99%) accuracy after a soil specimen is deformed to an engineering strain of 3.83%. CRD and incremental loading consolidation tests and permeability tests are carried out and used to validate the proposed formulas. The results show good agreement. However, disagreement is observed when the formulas in the standards are used to determine the consolidation properties, and the degree of disagreement increases with increasing soil deformation. This finding further justifies the necessity of the proposed formulas for determining finite-strain consolidation properties from CRD consolidation tests.</p>